-
#400 by meberbs on 14 Nov, 2020 17:13
-
Related new article that is original source for the PM article.
Classic example of Betteridge's law of headlines. They very helpfully state the answer fairly quickly before going into detail.
https://www.space.com/can-emdrive-space-propulsion-concept-work -
#401 by RonM on 14 Nov, 2020 17:22
-
Related new article that is original source for the PM article.
Classic example of Betteridge's law of headlines. They very helpfully state the answer fairly quickly before going into detail.
https://www.space.com/can-emdrive-space-propulsion-concept-work
Link to the video from the article.
-
#402 by meberbs on 14 Nov, 2020 17:44
-
Thanks. I understand your arguments, but it seems to me that you simply do not understand how emdrive can work, and that other people do not understand it either. It is possible that the author himself does not yet understand how emdrive works.
You seem to have missed part of my point, namely that no one understands how it works, because it doesn't work. Your statements seem to be making the implicit assumption that it works, which is contradictory to the actual experiments. (You can go read the articles that Star One just helpfully posted for more detail.)Read the story in the attached file. It follows from the story that the size of any photon is equal to the size of the Universe.
The story is just a bunch of handwaving nonsense that has nothing to do with actual physics or how the universe works. (The question from the beginning of why it is harder to disentangle rather than entangle is easily answered in actual physics with the concept of entropy.)In short, if the universe is multidimensional, then it is possible that when photons jump between the walls inside a 3-dimensional resonator, there is also important physics going on outside the resonator (or in other dimensions).
The universe is not multidimensional in a way that those claims would make sense. If it was, then countless other experiments would have noticed the violations of the inverse square law in propagation of em waves. (This is in contrast to string theory which proposes a different type of multidimensional which does not support your suggestion here, and despite the name has nothing to do with your attachment.)If emdrive works and can create thrust, then you just need to do the right design and look for the right physics.
The emDrive does not work, so there is no need to do that. -
#403 by Alex_O on 17 Nov, 2020 03:36
-
No, I understand your point well. At the Technical University of Dresden, experiments were carried out on a correctly built balance and they said that there was no thrust. But as discussed, the microwave path in the Dresden Technical University is configured incorrectly, and after other (our discussions with you) it becomes clear that:Thanks. I understand your arguments, but it seems to me that you simply do not understand how emdrive can work, and that other people do not understand it either. It is possible that the author himself does not yet understand how emdrive works.
You seem to have missed part of my point, namely that no one understands how it works, because it doesn't work. Your statements seem to be making the implicit assumption that it works, which is contradictory to the actual experiments. (You can go read the articles that Star One just helpfully posted for more detail.)
a) the geometry of the resonator contains errors
b) fine tuning of the frequency, phase is done incorrectly
c) the main idea of tuning the microwave path is also chosen incorrectly.
d) physics for design is also wrong
This is real physics. In a random episode of entangling fishing rods, we saw the Big Idea. For the first time, since the time of the great Democritus and other ancients, who gave people the idea of an atomic, discrete structure of the world and the concept of emptiness.Read the story in the attached file. It follows from the story that the size of any photon is equal to the size of the Universe.
The story is just a bunch of handwaving nonsense that has nothing to do with actual physics or how the universe works. (The question from the beginning of why it is harder to disentangle rather than entangle is easily answered in actual physics with the concept of entropy.)
We learned that if there is elementary matter in the universe, then this matter does not need discrete atoms. This matter does not need a chemical composition. And the term emptiness is no longer required.
As for entropy. Let me remind you that entropy units are Joules per Kelvin or kg⋅m2 ⋅s−2 K−1. If you use the term entropy to study the structure of the universe, you must first know what is mass and what is energy.
Upd.
That there is time - it would also be nice to figure it out. Where the term time is like a physical process that takes place in the universe, something like that.
A thought experiment with a lamp, wind, tree crown and a play of shadows on the wall of a house just showed another Big Idea - that the universe can consist of a set of physical phenomena that exist by themselves - and we humans (observers of the universe) are just a projection ... And yes, you can call it physical dimensions if you like the term better.In short, if the universe is multidimensional, then it is possible that when photons jump between the walls inside a 3-dimensional resonator, there is also important physics going on outside the resonator (or in other dimensions).
The universe is not multidimensional in a way that those claims would make sense. If it was, then countless other experiments would have noticed the violations of the inverse square law in propagation of em waves. (This is in contrast to string theory which proposes a different type of multidimensional which does not support your suggestion here, and despite the name has nothing to do with your attachment.)
All this helps to understand what needs to be done in order to build an engine for movement in outer space without the release of a previously stored reactive mass. And what mistakes happened in experiments with Emdrive.If emdrive works and can create thrust, then you just need to do the right design and look for the right physics.
The emDrive does not work, so there is no need to do that.
Example. You have built a test bench for testing Emdrive. You want to know engine thrust. And what are you doing? You study the trajectory of its possible movement. This is mistake.
An external force is applied to the engine (which works without ejection of the propellant), like the pressure force from the side of the universe. The magnitude of this force depends on the design and on the power (energy density) in the working body of this machine.
Please show me:
a) the point of application of this force
b) force plot
c) a module for controlling the design (geometry) adjustment and internal energy flows for fine-tuning a laboratory experiment.
d) show at least an idea (or even a theory) that helps to fine tune the physical processes in your engine.
It's funny. In well-known experiments with emdrive, none of this is present. In addition to the experiments of its author, where the author tried to do a more advanced microwave setting.
Upd.
Just a thought. All failed Emdrive experiments use a mechanical brake. Damping module. This device prevents (harms) to see in the experiment the possible manifestation of the main effect - the force of pressure (action) from the side of the universe. -
#404 by edzieba on 17 Nov, 2020 10:25
-
And all that is predicated on there being a 'correct' design in the first place.
No, I understand your point well. At the Technical University of Dresden, experiments were carried out on a correctly built balance and they said that there was no thrust. But as discussed, the microwave path in the Dresden Technical University is configured incorrectly, and after other (our discussions with you) it becomes clear that:Thanks. I understand your arguments, but it seems to me that you simply do not understand how emdrive can work, and that other people do not understand it either. It is possible that the author himself does not yet understand how emdrive works.
You seem to have missed part of my point, namely that no one understands how it works, because it doesn't work. Your statements seem to be making the implicit assumption that it works, which is contradictory to the actual experiments. (You can go read the articles that Star One just helpfully posted for more detail.)
a) the geometry of the resonator contains errors
b) fine tuning of the frequency, phase is done incorrectly
c) the main idea of tuning the microwave path is also chosen incorrectly.
d) physics for design is also wrong
Thus far, after a decade, not one person or team has demonstrated a device that has produced thrust above the noise floor. Every device that has initially reported appreciable thrust has subsequently reported less and less thrust as they refine their test apparatus to reduce sources of error. Worse, most experimenters seem to make the same test apparatus mistakes over and over again, repeating the cycle of we-found-a-thrust-oh-wait-there-it-goes.
When there is no theory of action or design because nobody has a working device to measure (and existing theories are in contradiction of measured properties of the universe), and no working devices built because nobody has the theory to design them with, it takes an enormous leap of logic to conclude there was ever anything to find to start with. -
#405 by JohnFornaro on 17 Nov, 2020 12:46
-
Related new article that is original source for the PM article.
Classic example of Betteridge's law of headlines. They very helpfully state the answer fairly quickly before going into detail.
https://www.space.com/can-emdrive-space-propulsion-concept-work
Link to the video from the article.
Just a few seconds into this video. Of course EM drive doesn't work! How do we know? The guy speaks in a condescending tone and waves his hands about a lot. Plus he's very animated! I'm voicing my dislike of this style of video, which one sees a lot of on the internot.
Anyhow, EM drive doesn't work, this guy's stylistic histrionics notwithstanding. I personally believe that mankind does not know everything about the universe, and think that there is something about inertia, which acts locally, that if more completely understood, might lead to a propellantless drive.
However, that will not happen if the so-called "scientific" community here bans members for stylistic reasons, and which continues to promote magical theories.
Edit: The article link doesn't work. -
#406 by JohnFornaro on 17 Nov, 2020 12:49
-
And all that is predicated on there being a 'correct' design in the first place.
Thus far, after a decade, not one person or team has demonstrated a device that has produced thrust above the noise floor. Every device that has initially reported appreciable thrust has subsequently reported less and less thrust as they refine their test apparatus to reduce sources of error. Worse, most experimenters seem to make the same test apparatus mistakes over and over again, repeating the cycle of we-found-a-thrust-oh-wait-there-it-goes.
When there is no theory of action or design because nobody has a working device to measure (and existing theories are in contradiction of measured properties of the universe), and no working devices built because nobody has the theory to design them with, it takes an enormous leap of logic to conclude there was ever anything to find to start with.
Pretty much bingo. -
#407 by RonM on 17 Nov, 2020 16:32
-
Related new article that is original source for the PM article.
Classic example of Betteridge's law of headlines. They very helpfully state the answer fairly quickly before going into detail.
https://www.space.com/can-emdrive-space-propulsion-concept-work
Link to the video from the article.
Just a few seconds into this video. Of course EM drive doesn't work! How do we know? The guy speaks in a condescending tone and waves his hands about a lot. Plus he's very animated! I'm voicing my dislike of this style of video, which one sees a lot of on the internot.
Anyhow, EM drive doesn't work, this guy's stylistic histrionics notwithstanding. I personally believe that mankind does not know everything about the universe, and think that there is something about inertia, which acts locally, that if more completely understood, might lead to a propellantless drive.
However, that will not happen if the so-called "scientific" community here bans members for stylistic reasons, and which continues to promote magical theories.
Edit: The article link doesn't work.
The only way an EM drive can work is with new physics. Since Shawyer claims it works under existing theories, which can be shown to be impossible, the negative tone is understandable.
Propellantless drives do exist, they operate via electromagnetism, such as electric motors. If there was some sort of currently unknown field for the EM drive to react with maybe it would work. But Shawyer's theory has nothing to do with new physics, so without a workable theory to test where do experimenters go from here? -
#408 by Alex_O on 18 Nov, 2020 06:02
-
And all that is predicated on there being a 'correct' design in the first place.
No, I understand your point well. At the Technical University of Dresden, experiments were carried out on a correctly built balance and they said that there was no thrust. But as discussed, the microwave path in the Dresden Technical University is configured incorrectly, and after other (our discussions with you) it becomes clear that:Thanks. I understand your arguments, but it seems to me that you simply do not understand how emdrive can work, and that other people do not understand it either. It is possible that the author himself does not yet understand how emdrive works.
You seem to have missed part of my point, namely that no one understands how it works, because it doesn't work. Your statements seem to be making the implicit assumption that it works, which is contradictory to the actual experiments. (You can go read the articles that Star One just helpfully posted for more detail.)
a) the geometry of the resonator contains errors
b) fine tuning of the frequency, phase is done incorrectly
c) the main idea of tuning the microwave path is also chosen incorrectly.
d) physics for design is also wrong
Thus far, after a decade, not one person or team has demonstrated a device that has produced thrust above the noise floor. Every device that has initially reported appreciable thrust has subsequently reported less and less thrust as they refine their test apparatus to reduce sources of error. Worse, most experimenters seem to make the same test apparatus mistakes over and over again, repeating the cycle of we-found-a-thrust-oh-wait-there-it-goes.
When there is no theory of action or design because nobody has a working device to measure (and existing theories are in contradiction of measured properties of the universe), and no working devices built because nobody has the theory to design them with, it takes an enormous leap of logic to conclude there was ever anything to find to start with.
There is no theory for emdrive, so what? Many ideas have been expressed and I will now add a little thought.
Emdrive is a technical system, device, mechanism. There is a source of energy, there is a working body. Any mechanism uses different physical effects for its work. Recall the history of machines, such as hard drives. Engineers once invented a machine - a spinning disk as a device for writing information onto the surface of a disk, and then physicists were constantly inventing new physical effects of writing bytes to a hard disk. We started with 5 MB and ended with terabytes. And this is not the limit.
In short, emdrive is a mechanism, it needs physics as a provider, a provider of physical effects. Physics for EMDrive is a secondary phenomenon.
What is a machine, a mechanism? This is a thing that needs to be started, started, made to work. A simple action - turn on the start button - this may not be enough.
The attached video shows an example of starting the machine. Enjoy watching and try to find something similar in famous emdrive releases.
As you can see from the video, starting the car is a difficult task
-
#409 by Alex_O on 18 Nov, 2020 06:33
-
ust an unexpected thought, accidentally came up with it, I don't know yet what this all means, discuss it?
An oscillating circuit is known. This is a device where a portion of energy can be transferred from the inductor to the capacitor and back many times.
At the same time, the black box that contains the oscillatory circuit can be at rest or make a uniform translational movement, and in general this is not important, since the state of rest or movement is a relative thing.
And here is the impulse. The same black box, and there is a certain outline for the movement of the impulse. For example, a portion of the energy from the pendulum is converted into the energy of the compressed gas and back. If there is no friction (loss), then this thing can work forever.
We are modernizing. Let the impulse (like the energy in the circuit) pass from the black box to the environment. The impulse flew out of the box - the speed of the box increased. The impulse returned to the black box from the environment - the speed of the black box increased again.
But it will be a uniform, forward motion and that is equivalent to a state of rest. Everything is relative, but after such operations the black box will be able to "accelerate" to the speed of light. But even after acceleration - the state of the box is equivalent to the state of rest, as is relativity. As if nothing had happened.
Now let's translate all this into technical language. If you want to build such a rocket, you need to learn how to program the environment. You need to teach (teach) the environment to return the impulse (that flew out of the black box) back. On the principle of an oscillating circuit. Any ideas?
Something about the Doppler effect, no? -
#410 by JohnFornaro on 18 Nov, 2020 17:39
-
There is no theory for emdrive, so what?
The blue craft in the video is analogous to an EM drive. The friction between the wheels and the surface of the planet gives the blue craft power source to ability to move in a preferred direction, without expelling propellant.
What's missing in the EM drive theory is: What does the drive push against? -
#411 by Alex_O on 18 Nov, 2020 19:18
-
There is no theory for emdrive, so what?
The blue craft in the video is analogous to an EM drive. The friction between the wheels and the surface of the planet gives the blue craft power source to ability to move in a preferred direction, without expelling propellant.
What's missing in the EM drive theory is: What does the drive push against?
Harold White discussed pushing a vacuum plasma, other authors discussed the generation of a pressure force from the vacuum side or the idea of sucking a vacuum.
The video by design demonstrates the problem that if you have a motor that can, in principle, create movement (even if the physical principle of this movement is still unknown), then the task of starting this motor is not trivial. That if the conical resonator is connected in the correct way to the microwave source and the waveguide assemblies are well tuned, this does not mean that your motor will start working immediately. Perhaps you just turned on the tap and supplied fuel. But the activation of the motor mode has not yet happened. Something else needs to be done.
For example, you must first create a portion of N. White's vacuum plasma, make sure that this substance has electromagnetic properties, that it has a mass and it can freely pass through the thick copper walls of the conical resonator. Further, this substance may have (by analogy with the known microparticles) some half-life, and if this time is somehow short, you need to have time to hit it with an electric field, for example. It is not a fact that if you already have an EM field in the cavity of the resonator, it is not a fact that this field will have time to fire. It may simply not be in time or will shoot as something wrong.
What is the speech about. That the well-known emdrive replicas do not have the necessary technical solutions for, for example, generating portions of vacuum plasma and controlling this substance.
And if you look at the information about the experiments of Evgeny Podkletnov, you can think that the EMDrive machine will work without the direct use of electromagnetic forces. No, a high Q resonator will be useful, but as a tool for creating high energy potentials in the right place at the right time. -
#412 by RotoSequence on 18 Nov, 2020 19:22
-
All the theories don't matter, at all, if you can't predict reality with them. Nobody with an EM drive theory has succeeded in predicting reality, and it's the height of foolishness to focus on how wonderful the predictions of these theories are when none of them produce results.
-
#413 by darkenfast on 18 Nov, 2020 21:28
-
Alex_O, the various men who invented the internal combustion engines such as that is shown in the tractor above had one thing in common. They did NOT just throw together pieces of metal and some chemicals and wish for magic to happen. They knew (through long study and real work), the science of the day and things like the laws of thermodynamics. They were operating in the real world. They harnessed the power resulting from the combustion of fuel and oxidizer. They knew that combustion would happen. It wasn't imaginary, it was a real phenomenon. They knew that they would have to contain it, provide cooling, and mechanically connect the engine to something in order for it to provide useful work. They succeeded. The EM drive has never succeeded. It cannot succeed because it relies on magic that does not exist.
I have no idea whether the people who are trying to sell this or other impossible drives are just doing so mistakenly or actively running a scam in order to make money or prop up their careers. But the time and energy wasted on this could really be better spent on real-world science and engineering. -
#414 by JohnFornaro on 19 Nov, 2020 12:25
-
... the task of starting this motor is not trivial
Y'all don't have a "motor", therefore, having trouble starting it should not be a surprise. -
#415 by JohnFornaro on 19 Nov, 2020 12:40
-
The various [people] who invented the internal combustion engine...did NOT just throw together pieces of metal...
They also stood on the shoulders of the previous inventors, such as Hero, the inventor of the Aeolipile. True, somebody needs to be that "Hero", because the EM drive, or whatever the propellantless drive might be called, needs to have been invented by someone.Quote from: darkenfastI have no idea whether the people who are trying to sell this or other impossible drives are just doing so mistakenly or actively running a scam in order to make money or prop up their careers. But the time and energy wasted on this could really be better spent on real-world science and engineering.
Many of the readers here, some of whom I know, have voiced a similar complaint. Fortunately reading the name of some of the posters here can save much time.
When one of the experimenters here has results to share, they will surely write about it. -
#416 by JohnFornaro on 19 Nov, 2020 12:41
-
All the theories don't matter, at all, if you can't predict reality with them. Nobody with an EM drive theory has succeeded in predicting reality, and it's the height of foolishness to focus on how wonderful the predictions of these theories are when none of them produce results.
Bingo. -
#417 by TheTraveller on 19 Nov, 2020 13:09
-
Biting my tongue until the shoe drops.
-
#418 by edzieba on 19 Nov, 2020 14:07
-
The shoe has been up there for 10 years. It has a better record at ignoring gravity than all EMDrive-type designs at this point.
-
#419 by TheTraveller on 19 Nov, 2020 14:23
-
The shoe has been up there for 10 years. It has a better record at ignoring gravity than all EMDrive-type designs at this point.
Hi Edzieba,
Has been stated many times. Commercial interests restrict data release.
Those that deny what has been shared should prepare their responses upon commercial release.
Consider cavity trapped photons lose matching accelerated cavity gained momentum. CofM is conserved.
Increased cavity photon wavelength is the action, while accelerated cavity mass is the reaction.
Need to stop thinking about how mass to mass momentum transfer works as photons don't alter velocity but do alter wavelength when they lose/transfer momentum to mass.
Another thing to understand is the EmDrive uses fuel, being photon energy & momentum, which has much lower energy density than exothermic fossile fuels.
